Maradona: The Death of an Argentine Icon, the Battle for His Legacy, and Why Milei Cannot Stand Him

He was the footballer who transformed Napoli, won the 1986 World Cup with Argentina and became one of the most extraordinary—and controversial—figures in the history of sport.

But outside Argentina, there is often little understanding of what Maradona actually represents.

He was not simply a football player.

In Argentina, Maradona became a social, cultural and political symbol.

And that is precisely why his death, his family, his fortune and the circumstances surrounding his final days remain such an explosive subject.

A brief introduction for those who know only the footballer

Maradona was born in 1960 in Villa Fiorito, one of the poorest areas of Greater Buenos Aires.

He came from a working-class family and became extraordinarily wealthy through football.

His rise—from poverty to global fame—became part of the Argentine mythology surrounding him.

But his life was also marked by addiction, health problems, turbulent relationships, financial disputes and increasingly complicated relationships with his family and advisers.

He was simultaneously loved as a national hero and criticised as a deeply imperfect human being.

That contradiction is essential to understanding Maradona.

As a Harvard analysis noted after his death, the emotional reaction to Maradona in Argentina was comparable, in some respects, to the national mourning surrounding Eva Perón. (Harvard Gazette⁠)

For millions of Argentines, Maradona represented something larger than football: the possibility that someone born in extreme poverty could become the most famous Argentine on Earth.

What actually happened to Maradona?

On November 25, 2020, Maradona died at the age of 60.

He had recently undergone brain surgery for a subdural hematoma and was recovering in a rented house outside Buenos Aires.

The official medical findings attributed his death to acute pulmonary edema and cardiac failure.

But almost immediately, questions emerged.

Why was a man with such serious health problems recovering outside a hospital?

Who was responsible for monitoring him?

Was he receiving adequate medical care?

Could his death have been prevented?

Those questions eventually became a criminal case.

The prosecution argues that Maradona’s medical team failed to provide adequate care and ignored serious warning signs while he deteriorated.

A 2021 expert panel described the treatment as inadequate, deficient and reckless. Prosecutors argue that Maradona could have survived with proper hospitalisation and medical intervention. (AP News⁠)

The defence disputes this interpretation and argues, among other things, that Maradona had severe pre-existing conditions, resisted treatment and that his death was not necessarily preventable. (Reuters⁠)

That distinction matters.

There has been no final criminal conviction.

The question of legal responsibility remains before the courts.

Who are the accused?

The current trial involves seven healthcare professionals.

They include:

• Leopoldo Luque, Maradona’s neurosurgeon and one of his principal doctors;

• Agustina Cosachov, his psychiatrist;

• Carlos Díaz, his psychologist;

• Nancy Edith Forlini, involved in medical coordination;

• Ricardo Almirón, a nurse;

• Mariano Perroni, a nursing coordinator;

• Pedro Pablo Di Spagna, a physician.

An eighth defendant, nurse Gisella Madrid, is being tried separately. (Reuters⁠)

The prosecution alleges that the medical team failed in its duties and that the circumstances of Maradona’s home care contributed directly to his death.

The trial is therefore not asking whether Maradona had serious health problems.

He clearly did.

The central question is whether those caring for him failed to act when they should have acted.

Why did a global superstar end up in such a condition?

This may be the most disturbing part of the story.

Maradona had enormous financial resources and access to some of the world’s best medical professionals.

Yet by the end of his life, witnesses described the house where he was receiving care as lacking appropriate medical equipment and being unsuitable for the level of medical supervision he required. (Buenos Aires Times⁠)

The paradox is extraordinary.

A man who had accumulated fame, money and power ended his life in a situation that prosecutors describe as medically unacceptable.

This is where Maradona’s personal story becomes larger than football.

Money does not necessarily create protection.

Sometimes enormous wealth creates an ecosystem of advisers, lawyers, doctors, relatives, friends and intermediaries—each with different interests.

And when the central figure is vulnerable, it can become extremely difficult to determine who is actually protecting him.

The family: love, conflict and money

Maradona’s family history was complicated long before his death.

He had two daughters with Claudia Villafañe, Dalma and Gianinna, and later acknowledged other children.

After his death, questions surrounding his heirs and assets became a major legal battle.

Reports at the time estimated his wealth at tens of millions of dollars, although the true value of his estate was difficult to establish because it included properties, cars, commercial contracts, image rights and assets in different jurisdictions. (MercoPress⁠)

Maradona also died without a clearly established will, creating the possibility of disputes over inheritance and paternity. (Genealogists in London | Fraser & Fraser⁠)

The economic dimension therefore cannot be separated from the family story.

Who owns the Maradona name?

Who controls his image?

Who receives the revenues?

Who manages his commercial legacy?

Who has the right to negotiate sponsorships, documentaries, merchandising and licensing?

After Maradona’s death, these were not abstract questions.

They represented potentially enormous financial interests.

There were already bitter disputes between members of the family and Maradona’s former lawyer Matías Morla over his brand and image rights. (Buenos Aires Times⁠)

The tragedy of Maradona therefore continued after his death.

His body disappeared.

His economic value did not.

Why does Javier Milei dislike Maradona?

This is where European observers often misunderstand Argentina.

Maradona was politically outspoken.

He identified himself as a Peronist and publicly supported figures including Néstor and Cristina Kirchner. He also developed highly visible relationships with Fidel Castro and Hugo Chávez and displayed admiration for Che Guevara. (Newsweek⁠)

Javier Milei represents almost the opposite political universe.

Milei’s political identity is built around radical economic liberalism, hostility toward the political establishment and particularly fierce opposition to Peronism and what he describes as collectivism and statism.

Maradona therefore represents something Milei fundamentally rejects.

Not merely a footballer.

A political and cultural symbol of Argentina’s popular, Peronist and left-wing tradition.

This explains why the conflict between the Milei camp and Maradona’s legacy has become so personal and symbolic.

In August 2024, Milei’s presidential spokesman Manuel Adorni deliberately omitted Maradona when listing famous Argentine left-footed figures during International Left-Handers Day.

When journalists pointed out the omission, Adorni responded dismissively, asking:

“Who?”

The episode produced immediate outrage in Argentina. (El País⁠)

It was not an innocent omission.

It was understood by many Argentines as a political statement.

And it revealed something important:

Milei can compete with Maradona politically because Maradona is still powerful even after death.

Why Maradona remains dangerous to Milei’s political narrative

Maradona represents a completely different idea of Argentina.

Milei speaks about markets, individual freedom, private property, austerity and the dismantling of what he calls the “political caste.”

Maradona represents popular culture, football, working-class identity, Peronism and a form of Argentine nationalism that is emotional rather than economic.

The two visions could hardly be more different.

One speaks primarily through economic theory.

The other speaks through memory.

And memory is extraordinarily difficult to defeat politically.

You can criticise Maradona’s addictions.

You can criticise his private life.

You can criticise his political opinions.

You can criticise his relationships.

You can question his behaviour.

But none of that changes what happened in 1986.

For an entire generation of Argentines, Maradona gave them one of the greatest collective moments of national pride in their history.

That cannot simply be erased by political disagreement.

The uncomfortable truth about Maradona

There is also a danger in turning Maradona into a saint.

He was not one.

He was an extraordinary footballer and an extraordinarily complicated man.

His life contained addiction, excess, broken relationships, financial disputes and political controversies.

But reducing him to his failures is equally dishonest.

The real Maradona was both things:

genius and self-destruction; hero and flawed human being; millionaire and man who never completely escaped his origins; global celebrity and deeply Argentine symbol.

That complexity is precisely why his death remains so powerful.

The real tragedy

The greatest tragedy may not be that Maradona died.

Everyone dies.

It is that a man who had conquered almost everything in football ended his life surrounded by uncertainty over who was protecting him, who was making decisions for him and whether the people responsible for his care actually fulfilled their duties.

The courts must now decide the legal responsibility.

They should do so without political pressure and without allowing Maradona’s enormous mythology to replace evidence.

If negligence is proven, those responsible should be held accountable.

If it is not proven, they must be acquitted.

But the investigation has already exposed a much larger problem.

What happens when a vulnerable global celebrity becomes the centre of a network involving family, money, medicine, lawyers, image rights and political symbolism?

Maradona’s death is therefore not only a story about football.

It is a story about power, money, family, addiction, celebrity, politics and the extraordinary difficulty of protecting someone who has become more valuable as a symbol than as a human being.

And perhaps this is why Maradona remains so uncomfortable for Argentina.

Because even in death, he refuses to become simply a historical figure.

He remains a political argument.

A cultural battle.

An economic asset.

And, for millions of Argentines, still Diego.

Roberto Balbino — CEO, Fintech SCB.
Independent analyst of finance, economics, geopolitics and global markets.